Trolling in real life can be hazardous to one's liberty

According to Megan Crepeau's story, posted yesterday evening on the Chicago Tribune website ("Man charged with breaking judge's window with snowball ordered held without bond"), Michael Laurento has already admitted to investigators that he cussed out a judge and threw a 'snowball' through the window of her home. (I'm putting quote marks around 'snowball' because one would not expect your typical, run-of-the-mill snowball to break window glass. Perhaps if it were thrown by Matthew Stafford. At close range.)

Anyway, if Laurento really has admitted doing the things described in the Tribune article, he is about to find out the difference between trolling a judge online and in real life.

Trolling online doesn't always work. Sometimes killjoy, busybody bloggers flush the really 'good' comments. Trolling in real life eliminates that sort of interference. And there's the real and immediate satisfaction derived from driving by the judge in question, cursing her from the comfort and privacy of one's own car while the judge puts up a campaign sign (the judge in question, Stephanie Miller, is seeking to hold on to her 6th Subcircuit seat).

On the other hand, said judge could, and apparently did, jot down the license plate number of the troll-mobile. Anonymity compromised! And, as illustrated by the present case, the real-life troll does run the risk of being held, without bail, on two felony charges ("criminal damage to property and threatening a public official," according to the Tribune article), pending trial.

Second City Cop also has a post up today ("No bail?") about these incidents.

SCC's take, though, is a little different: The police blog riffs off Ms. Crepeau's lead (I was taught to write lede, not lead, but I've since been told that's just too pretentious). Crepeau wrote, "A Chicago man with only a misdemeanor supervision in his past was ordered held without bail Tuesday...." SCC suggests, without stating expressly, that a person with "only a misdemeanor supervision in his past" who did the things Mr. Laurento is accused of, but who did them to someone who was not a judge, would not have been charged with such serious offenses and would have received an 'affordable bail.' (Of course, one can't be charged with threatening a public official where one's victim is not a public official.)

But SCC is really talking about optics, not about whether there was strict adherence in this particular instance with General Order 18-8A. SCC concludes, "It certainly would be nice to see some consistency across the board in Cook County Courts and not simply based on who the victim happens to be."

Personally, I am entirely on board with the denial of bail to Mr. Laurento, particularly if, as Ms. Crepeau writes, he has admitted committing the acts in question.

On the other hand, I see SCC's point, too. Particularly where crime is soaring in the Loop and other once-'safe' areas of the City. (See, for example, ""Unthinkable": Loop Violent Crime Up 97%, But Rahm Has CUT The Number Of Cops There.") Where carjackings have surged throughout the Chicago area. (See, "CPD announces new joint task force to combat carjackings.") Where persons accused of carjacking are often returned to the streets within 24 hours. (See, Most juveniles charged with armed carjackings let go in 24 hours, records show.") And where at least one of those promptly released alleged carjackers was soon thereafter re-arrested in another stolen car -- and carrying a gun.

Whatever. The art or science of granting or denying bail, or setting the amount of bail, and the host of factors that are, or could or should be, considered in making these decisions, is well beyond the scope of this post.

But in one of those odd little coincidences that keeps us going, the regular assignment of the judge whose real-life troll was denied bail, is making bail determinations for others. (However, for the record, neither Judge Miller, nor any of her colleagues in the new Pretrial Division, had anything to do with denying Mr. Laurento bail; that determination was made by a different judge, specially assigned for the matter in question.)